The battle for Second Amendment rights never ends, but where it is really fought is in the federal court system. We can all have our different opinions on what our rights are, but ultimately the court system is who has the final say.
These are the court cases that have real weight that are currently being litigated or are awaiting a decision.
Dominic Bianchi v. Brian Frosh
Bianchi v Frosh is a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals case that contested Maryland’s assault weapons ban. It was remanded to the Fourth Circuit by the Supreme Court after the ruling in NYSPRA v Bruen for reconsideration.
The Fourth Circuit is not the only appellate court with an assault weapons ban up for reconsideration.
The importance, of course, is hard to understate as multiple states are currently trying to pass or enact an assault weapon ban, as well as President Biden calling for a renewal of the Clinton AWB.
Duncan v. Bonta and Rupp v. Bonta
Another pair of cases being reconsidered after Bruen were Duncan v. Bonta and Rupp v. Bonta. These cases were originally decided in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals but were not granted writs to proceed to the Supreme Court when originally decided.
Duncan challenged California’s magazine capacity ban, whilst Rupp challenged that state’s assault weapon ban. Both suits were initially decided by Judge Roger Benitez (who ruled against the state of California), but his decisions were overturned on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.
The Supreme Court ordered both cases to be reconsidered by Benitez.
The Ninth Circuit is famously (or infamously) difficult for gun rights suits, as that court tends to rule in favor of legislation. Were the Ninth Circuit to have to reverse a decision, it would be all but a serious blow to any piece of firearms legislation of that type.
Rhode v. Bonta
Another California case to watch is Rhode v. Bonta, which seeks to keep the state of California from infringing on Second Amendment rights by other means. The suit challenges California’s more stringent laws on ammunition purchases, which is a second-line tactic to keep lawful gun owners from being able to purchase ammunition or at least make it more difficult.
California requires a background check to purchase ammunition, so hampering the ability of anyone to buy ammunition is an obvious method to obstruct gun owners from being able to actually fire their guns, regardless of the context.
Ammunition restrictions are one of the next waves of gun control; if they can’t make it hard to buy guns or magazines, make it harder to buy ammunition, or severely restrict where a person can carry outside the home.
Eyre V. Rosenblum
Eyre v. Rosenblum is a challenge to Oregon Measure 114 in Oregon. Currently, the good news is that the law has been enjoined by a state court order, which was upheld by the Oregon Supreme Court.
However, Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum has indicated that her office will continue to do whatever can be done to pursue the case so the law can be enforced. The suit and the law is being held at bay, is not going away.
State Measure 114 is onerous, as it mandates universal background checks on firearm purchases, imposes a permit-to-purchase (akin to an FOID, but with a training requirement), and bans magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
Similar legislation has been proposed in neighboring Washington state, so this is certainly a template of gun control laws that will be pursued in other states should it be successfully enacted.
